Monk, Is there any reason for it


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 405 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

No, and yes.

As more information, classes, and books come out; the core options sometimes become lackluster and suboptimal. I like the idea of monks, though it is hard to balance them with other core classes while capturing the feel of the genre. This isn't limited to the monk and rogue....yet. Sooner or later some new archetype or hybrid class will come along and make some older class obsolete.
(I wanna play a summoner / druid hybrid class. Wow, imagine spamming the field with one of those!)

Of course, for GMs that run "core only" games, the new classes and archetypes are meaningless. Monks gain more power when hybrid advanced classes are eliminated from the equation.

I even ran a monk-only campaign once. It had a very 70s Shaw brothers kung-fu feel to the campaign, and was tons of fun. Since everyone played the same class, no one complained about class balance issues.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

The first thing my friends and I did when Brawler was released in full was to convert are monks to that class to see how well it stood up. In nearly every instance, the monk class has proven to be more powerful--primarily in the defense department, where the brawler suffers greatly at in comparison.

Brawler did appear to be much more versatile though.


Honestly, while it's tough to build a monk right, you can do respectable things with all the splat. Archetypes and Pummeling Style help a lot. The Brawler is better for certain concepts, but it has mechanical and thematic differences with the monk that mean there is still enough reason to play a monk.

The monk can now zoom across the battlefield and full attack like no other class, between their enhanced movement, Pummeling Style, and Dragon style. They finally have a way to synergize their movement stuff with their flurry, and to my knowledge they are the best class if you want someone who can jump and flip around like a madman.

It is is unfortunate how many concepts benefit more from a dip in monk than actually being a monk, I will grant you.


Also, the Brawler requires a lot of work to optimize as well, that comes up in actual play when you decide what feats to take. A well-built monk is lower on the resource management aspect of things, and I would totally hand a new player a Monk over a Brawler if I had to build it for them. (Unless it's a Brawler archetype that gives up Martial Flexibility.)


The Genie wrote:

No no no see the Rogue was at least a skill monkey and had trap abilities (Now a lot of classes have trap abilities true)

But the Monk has been hated by both the Devs for 3/3.5 and now Pathfinder.

If they do have for example a cool Archetype they restrict it from working with a few good complimenting archetypes.

Basically the Brawler with Monk Robes adds Wis to AC (Treated as a Monk after all) and AC bonus of a Monk five levels higher... which stacks with his own AC boost as Dodge bonuses stack with itself.

Actually the Rogue has been more eviscerated than any core class... Now you have:

Investiator, Slayer, Bard, Ranger, Alchemist, and Inquisitor that do its job just as well... if not better. And with archetypes and traits they LITERALLY can do everything a rogue does... but better.


Again, Monks are better built for utility, tanking and so on.

Build to have a ton of AC and inescapable Stunning Strikes, build to have a ton of attack damage and mobility, or build one of the specialized builds and help your team in different ways.

One of my favorite builds is this, just because of how fun it is, is to build a Crushing Blow-specialist Sensei. Since your full-attacks suck because you don't have Flurry of Blows, you spend them throwing CRUSHING BLOWS to split enemies apart. Another fun thing to do with this guy is to take Eldritch Heritage - Imperious to make your Inspiration abilities better, or Noble Scion: Peace and Wisdom in the Flesh (Disable Device) and Trapfinder to also get rid of traps easily.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

the problem I see with tanking, is that in pathfinder that's not generally a job that people need. encounters die pretty quickly to rocket tag. if you need a monk to tank for you, you have other issues, but yeah, if everything is going to hell, a monk will be the last guy standing, and probably still alive as he goes mach 5 to retreat.


I am suprised NO ONE has mention how [url=http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/warpriest/archetypes/paizo---warpriest-archetypes/sacred-fist]this guy can do the whole mystic monk guy better than the monk[url]. I mean this archetype is literally just "Take the monk, remove all the stupid mystic crap that makes no sense (Tongue of Sun and Moon? Really? Oh and don't mention feather fall since every monk ever tends to trade that out through Qinggong) for mystical abilities that actually do something."

Granted, there are still reasons to take monk, you just won't be doing the whole "monk thing" people are used to. For instance, Zen Archer is easily one of the strongest archers in the game. And, depending on how people rule with Pummeling Style regarding weapons that can be flurried they straight up BECOME THE STRONGEST ARCHER IN THE GAME. The Master of Many Styles is still a hugely popular class to dip into. And the core monk is actually a popular dip for said Sacred Fist (depending on which side of the whole "double dipping to attributes" fence your on)


Bandw2 wrote:
the problem I see with tanking, is that in pathfinder that's not generally a job that people need. encounters die pretty quickly to rocket tag. if you need a monk to tank for you, you have other issues, but yeah, if everything is going to hell, a monk will be the last guy standing, and probably still alive as he goes mach 5 to retreat.

I find monk DPR to be pretty high since they rarely get hard CC to stick on them. Built right they have pretty high AC. I ran a one-shot with that previous monk build against a party of 4 characters the same level. I threw on a persistent min-DC cloudkill effect in the room to keep it fair. She almost solo'd the party (she retreated to the next boss room via abundant step when her HP got low). If it wasn't for the cyber-soldier tech fighter and his mono-whips, she would have won against the divine protection oracle, arcanist, and CRB-monk(*sigh*) party.


to OP: yes and no.

yes if: you're using any of the 'shield' archetypes that people hide behind to say the monk isnt bad (zen archer, tetori, sohei), or yes in technicality if you're dipping MoMS for styles (dragon+pummeling will see a lot of use in the future methinks)

no if: you're not taking the above routes, or are in a game allowing the sacred fist archetype. brawler is a tricky thing (if you want more offense, go brawler. if you want more defense for some reason, go monk) but more flexible in combat.

notes: you can make a decent martial monk if you squeeze every advantage you can out of it (dip cleric for guided hand/crusader's flurry and use a weapon that doesnt totally suck, or weapon master fighter for the BAB+WT+gloves combo), but then if you wanted to be a wis-centric guy with decent weapons and mystic powers, play an inquisitor.

unfortunately unarmed combat is pretty much out entirely for the class most iconic for it--the AoMF is a huge moneysink for little reason beyond "we didnt want the monsters to be too powerful" (despite the fact that that's in the hands of the DM: you know, the same guy who can beef up monsters without a puny necklace designed pretty much solely for the monk).
sure, you could shell out 6400g for a clockwork prosthetic (from magical marketplace), but you're literally trading an arm and/or leg to be good at unarmed combat. not to mention other classes get better unarmed things by themselves (see the brawling armor enchant that was specifically barred from monks, how laughable the bodywraps of impotent strikes is, and so on).
.

now i wonder, could one qualify for the champion of irori AT as a straight sacred fist?


Yes, because playing a monk can be rewarding and fun. Your experience may vary.


this guy can do the whole mystic monk guy better than the monk.

Wow I suck.....


AndIMustMask wrote:

to OP: yes and no.

yes if: you're using any of the 'shield' archetypes that people hide behind to say the monk isnt bad (zen archer, tetori, sohei), or yes in technicality if you're dipping MoMS for styles (dragon+pummeling will see a lot of use in the future methinks)

no if: you're not taking the above routes, or are in a game allowing the sacred fist archetype. brawler is a tricky thing (if you want more offense, go brawler. if you want more defense for some reason, go monk) but more flexible in combat.

notes: you can make a decent martial monk if you squeeze every advantage you can out of it (dip cleric for guided hand/crusader's flurry and use a weapon that doesnt totally suck, or weapon master fighter for the BAB+WT+gloves combo), but then if you wanted to be a wis-centric guy with decent weapons and mystic powers, play an inquisitor.

unfortunately unarmed combat is pretty much out entirely for the class most iconic for it--the AoMF is a huge moneysink for little reason beyond "we didnt want the monsters to be too powerful" (despite the fact that that's in the hands of the DM: you know, the same guy who can beef up monsters without a puny necklace designed pretty much solely for the monk).
sure, you could shell out 6400g for a clockwork prosthetic (from magical marketplace), but you're literally trading an arm and/or leg to be good at unarmed combat. not to mention other classes get better unarmed things by themselves (see the brawling armor enchant that was specifically barred from monks, how laughable the bodywraps of impotent strikes is, and so on).
.

now i wonder, could one qualify for the champion of irori AT as a straight sacred fist?

Actually they capped teh crap out of the AoMF because of the druid of all things...

Essentially they were worried about Druids being WAY to overpowered if you allowed them to make 8 tentacle attacks (all with grab) with full enchantments on each tentacle...


I am playing a monk in a Jade Regent campaign right now. We are currently 12th level and I have really enjoyed it so far.

I have not found the character to be underpowered at all and have remained a contributing and reliable asset to the party the entire time.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
the problem I see with tanking, is that in pathfinder that's not generally a job that people need. encounters die pretty quickly to rocket tag. if you need a monk to tank for you, you have other issues, but yeah, if everything is going to hell, a monk will be the last guy standing, and probably still alive as he goes mach 5 to retreat.
I find monk DPR to be pretty high since they rarely get hard CC to stick on them. Built right they have pretty high AC. I ran a one-shot with that previous monk build against a party of 4 characters the same level. I threw on a persistent min-DC cloudkill effect in the room to keep it fair. She almost solo'd the party (she retreated to the next boss room via abundant step when her HP got low). If it wasn't for the cyber-soldier tech fighter and his mono-whips, she would have won against the divine protection oracle, arcanist, and CRB-monk(*sigh*) party.

all true, obviously tanking works well against a party, but as a party member, it's meh when everyone else is going to kill as many people as possible before they can do damage.


Malwing wrote:
I play with a lot of third party so for me I play monk to shoot hadokens debuff and have a lot of caster defenses.

Sadly, the Sacred Fist and base Warpriest BOTH do a better job at this - they shoot Kamehamehas with Blood Crow Strike when combo'd with Pummeling Style now.


The Genie wrote:
Is there any reason to play a monk?

The base Monk? No. But the Archetypes?

Ooooh, yes. Oh, so very much, "yes".

Zen Archer and Master of Many Styles are still some of the most powerful builds for Unarmed and Ranged combatants you can get.

The Sacred Fist is probably now far-and-away better than the base Monk at being the prototypical Wuxia master, and likely has superseded the Qinggong Monk as the "blaster" martial artist.

But the base Monk still has the increase to speed, gains Stunning Fist natively, is STILL the best Combat Maneuver abuser in the game (although Grapple is still the most reliable, sadly), has Slow Fall as an Extraordinary ability (meaning there's no Dispelling that little bitty), and Abundant Step is unique to the Monk and can be surprisingly powerful if used correctly. It even has some very useful Immunities, and gains SR10+Lv at lv13.

The problem is that after lv13, it's abilities are flufftacular and barely useful at all. Quivering Palm was good, and then Pummeling Style came into being and COMPLETELY replaced QP.

Timeless Body is useless 99.9% of the time, except vs that one spell that causes time to speed up (I don't even remember what it is, or maybe there isn't even one and I'm just having Vietnam-like flashbacks to 2nd Ed nonsense).

Tongue of the Sun and Moon is beyond useless.

Empty Body is cute but ultimately useless (well... unless you pull off some Jinora-esque scouting with it - then it's moderately useful).

Perfect Self... yeah, 'cause THIS lv20 ability is TOTALLY at the same level of power as Mighty Rage, Grand Discoveries, or even Weapon Mastery (actually, WM is pretty badass, so I shouldn't say "even").


chbgraphicarts wrote:
The Genie wrote:
Is there any reason to play a monk?

The base Monk? No. But the Archetypes?

Ooooh, yes. Oh, so very much, "yes".

Zen Archer and Master of Many Styles are still some of the most powerful builds for Unarmed and Ranged combatants you can get.

The Sacred Fist is probably now far-and-away better than the base Monk at being the prototypical Wuxia master, and likely has superseded the Qinggong Monk as the "blaster" martial artist.

But the base Monk still has the increase to speed, gains Stunning Fist natively, is STILL the best Combat Maneuver abuser in the game (although Grapple is still the most reliable, sadly), has Slow Fall as an Extraordinary ability (meaning there's no Dispelling that little bitty), and Abundant Step is unique to the Monk and can be surprisingly powerful if used correctly. It even has some very useful Immunities, and gains SR10+Lv at lv13.

The problem is that after lv13, it's abilities are flufftacular and barely useful at all. Quivering Palm was good, and then Pummeling Style came into being and COMPLETELY replaced QP.

Timeless Body is useless 99.9% of the time, except vs that one spell that causes time to speed up (I don't even remember what it is, or maybe there isn't even one and I'm just having Vietnam-like flashbacks to 2nd Ed nonsense).

Tongue of the Sun and Moon is beyond useless.

Empty Body is cute but ultimately useless (well... unless you pull off some Jenora-esque scouting with it - then it's moderately useful).

Perfect Self... yeah, 'cause THIS lv20 ability is TOTALLY at the same level of power as Mighty Rage, Grand Discoveries, or even Weapon Mastery (actually, WM is pretty badass, so I shouldn't say "even").

Um...

Abundent Step takes up A LOT of ki to use and without 4 feats its kinda meh...

Stunning Fist is horrid... with the exception of the Zen Archer monk build (aka THE ONE), it is usually just a waste of space...

Slow Fall may as well not exist on the class anymore... most monk builds I ever see pretty much universily trade the ability for Barkskin...

The SR the monk's get is kinda pitiful and for PCs, it can actually be a hinderance as much as it helps... if not more so...

The best Combat Manuever Expert is either the Druid (because Grab on 8 natural attacks is rediculous.. MONKTOPUS!!!!), the Defilier Hexcrafter build (that thing is just mean), the Brawler (he can just do all of them well enough), or the Lore Warden (the single best at any particulair combat manuever.)


PIXIE DUST wrote:
The best Combat Manuever Expert is either the Druid (because Grab on 8 natural attacks is rediculous.. MONKTOPUS!!!!), the Defilier Hexcrafter build (that thing is just mean), the Brawler (he can just do all of them well enough), or the Lore Warden (the single best at any particulair combat manuever.)

The Underfoot Adept (Human with Racial Heritage) is the best trip artist in the game, if only because he can trip things that are otherwise impossible for humanoids to trip.


chbgraphicarts wrote:
Malwing wrote:
I play with a lot of third party so for me I play monk to shoot hadokens debuff and have a lot of caster defenses.
Sadly, the Sacred Fist and base Warpriest BOTH do a better job at this - they shoot Kamehamehas with Blood Crow Strike when combo'd with Pummeling Style now.

I found Blood Crow Strike to be kinda weak compared to third party ki energy attack, mostly because it's a 4th level spell (very late and there are way better things I'd rather cast at that slot) and only deals unarmed strike damage without modification (I want my ki attacks to cripple). Also I'm not even sure if Pummeling Style works with that spell.


Arachnofiend wrote:
PIXIE DUST wrote:
The best Combat Manuever Expert is either the Druid (because Grab on 8 natural attacks is rediculous.. MONKTOPUS!!!!), the Defilier Hexcrafter build (that thing is just mean), the Brawler (he can just do all of them well enough), or the Lore Warden (the single best at any particulair combat manuever.)
The Underfoot Adept (Human with Racial Heritage) is the best trip artist in the game, if only because he can trip things that are otherwise impossible for humanoids to trip.

I completely forgot about them xD. When it comes to trip I usually think of the Lore Warden of Trip xD


The monk has better saves than any of the competition bar possibly the warpriest and the unarmed warpriest is not only a god botherer but pretty much restricted to a single god in Golarion and may not have any suitable gods at all in other settings.


Atarlost wrote:
The monk has better saves than any of the competition bar possibly the warpriest and the unarmed warpriest is not only a god botherer but pretty much restricted to a single god in Golarion and may not have any suitable gods at all in other settings.

??? The Sacred Fist is not restricted to a god that has unarmed strikes as their favored weapon. There's no reason why you couldn't make a Sacred Fist of Gorum, or anything else.


Arachnofiend wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
The monk has better saves than any of the competition bar possibly the warpriest and the unarmed warpriest is not only a god botherer but pretty much restricted to a single god in Golarion and may not have any suitable gods at all in other settings.
??? The Sacred Fist is not restricted to a god that has unarmed strikes as their favored weapon. There's no reason why you couldn't make a Sacred Fist of Gorum, or anything else.

And unless PFS REQUIRES that you worship a god to be a Cleric, there's always the "I follow a personal philosophy" route that's written in every Divine class.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Harrow Warden Monks trade Stunning Fist for Misfortune punches, which target will and (nearly) nothing is immune.

And besides that, at lvl 15 they get to punch enemies so hard they turn into adorable puppies forever.

So that's basically infinity reasons to be a monk.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I love monks. I follow the golden rule of ignoring the "monks suck" feeling the forums give off. I know monks have issues, but every monk I make has been a blast to play. The different archtypes keep it interesting for me.

Sure basically everyone trades out slow fall for something else. A ring of feather fall is not that expensive after all.

I for one do not see how a sacred fist makes a better monk than the monk. Ki pool much later, ac bonus to deflection, no disease immunity, high jump, evasion, skill points, reflex save, stunning fists (required for many style feats) andmore.

It is a cool archtype I would rather play than the cleric/monk or druid/monk I was planning as a replacement divine class for CC however. It just doesnt feel as cool as a monk. But like everything else in this game I will only really know once I play the class.

I sometimes get the feeling dpr is something far too many forum users focus on.

Sorry for the rant


Petty Alchemy wrote:

Harrow Warden Monks trade Stunning Fist for Misfortune punches, which target will and (nearly) nothing is immune.

And besides that, at lvl 15 they get to punch enemies so hard they turn into adorable puppies forever.

So that's basically infinity reasons to be a monk.

Just.... Wow!

"I punch you strong enough to put you back in diaper!"

A must try


Here is an idea of what can be made of a support/tank monk. Quite good and unique I think. There is enough reason in this build to play a monk IMO
Rojik, the sensei

Dwarf, Monk sensei/quigong 10
Str: 11+2
Dex: 12+2
Con: 14+2
Wis: 20+2+4
Int: 12
Cha: 5
Hp: 10d8+30=75
Ac 10+2(monk)+2(dex)+8(wis)+4(barkskin)+3(bracer)+1(dodge)=28
Init:+2
Save: will: 15(19) fort: 10(14) ref: 9(13)
Bab: +7/+2
Attack: fist: +17(1d10+6)
Special: stunning fist +19( dc23) 11 per day

Special: inspire courage +3 (18 rounds per day), barkskin (+3 na,1ki), scorching ray (2x+11, 4d6,2ki)

Feat: dodge, deflect arrow, steel soul, mantis style, mantis wisdom, blind-fight, mantis torment

Equipment: amulette of mighty fist+2, belt of physical perfection +2, headband of alluring wisdom +4, bracer of armor +3
The plan here: you do almost no damage. Your goal is: be the main target ( good ac, almost immune to magic), boost your allies and stun creature (at 23, even strong fort monster will fail almost 50% of the time...)


The Genie wrote:


So is there a reason?

Yes there is.

You're a Dragon. Especially a Metallic Dragon.

At least 2 levels of Monk really rocks for Dragons.
Especially if you go for Master of Many Styles Archtype.


Petty Alchemy wrote:

Harrow Warden Monks trade Stunning Fist for Misfortune punches, which target will and (nearly) nothing is immune.

And besides that, at lvl 15 they get to punch enemies so hard they turn into adorable puppies forever.

So that's basically infinity reasons to be a monk.

I have to say that is one of the coolest archetypes I have ever seen, and it stacks with Master of Many Styles. I'd actually consider staying Monk for it on an unarmed character instead of just doing the two level dip.


Skull wrote:

I love monks. I follow the golden rule of ignoring the "monks suck" feeling the forums give off. I know monks have issues, but every monk I make has been a blast to play. The different archtypes keep it interesting for me.

Sure basically everyone trades out slow fall for something else. A ring of feather fall is not that expensive after all.

I for one do not see how a sacred fist makes a better monk than the monk. Ki pool much later, ac bonus to deflection, no disease immunity, high jump, evasion, skill points, reflex save, stunning fists (required for many style feats) andmore.

It is a cool archtype I would rather play than the cleric/monk or druid/monk I was planning as a replacement divine class for CC however. It just doesnt feel as cool as a monk. But like everything else in this game I will only really know once I play the class.

I sometimes get the feeling dpr is something far too many forum users focus on.

Sorry for the rant

In exchange for 6th level spellcasting which can be done as swift actions, and Miraculous fortitude which trivializes the most common save in the game. And while some of them are lack luster, Blessings. Divine Power could be hilarious in the Sacred Fist's hands. One of the main problems with the monk is it can't hit. Divine power helps with that immensely and he has more attacks available to make use of the damage bonus.

And the rest of the spells offer varying levels of utility beyond DPR if that's what you want. Stunning barrier is an excellent defensive spell.


Skull wrote:

I love monks. I follow the golden rule of ignoring the "monks suck" feeling the forums give off. I know monks have issues, but every monk I make has been a blast to play. The different archtypes keep it interesting for me.

Sure basically everyone trades out slow fall for something else. A ring of feather fall is not that expensive after all.

I for one do not see how a sacred fist makes a better monk than the monk. Ki pool much later, ac bonus to deflection, no disease immunity, high jump, evasion, skill points, reflex save, stunning fists (required for many style feats) andmore.

It is a cool archtype I would rather play than the cleric/monk or druid/monk I was planning as a replacement divine class for CC however. It just doesnt feel as cool as a monk. But like everything else in this game I will only really know once I play the class.

I sometimes get the feeling dpr is something far too many forum users focus on.

Sorry for the rant

Spells over ride just about everything you said...

and the Blessings are actually pretty useful for Sacred Fists (free action summons here I come :P).

Sacred Fists get a Fort Save version of Evasion so that is cool.

High Jump is a joke ability... really, most monks tend to trade High Jump and Feather Fall for more useful abilities... oh and spells.

Skill points are cool, but monks rarely have the Int to get more. And skill points are kinda meh when you have spells.


PIXIE DUST wrote:
Skull wrote:

I love monks. I follow the golden rule of ignoring the "monks suck" feeling the forums give off. I know monks have issues, but every monk I make has been a blast to play. The different archtypes keep it interesting for me.

Sure basically everyone trades out slow fall for something else. A ring of feather fall is not that expensive after all.

I for one do not see how a sacred fist makes a better monk than the monk. Ki pool much later, ac bonus to deflection, no disease immunity, high jump, evasion, skill points, reflex save, stunning fists (required for many style feats) andmore.

It is a cool archtype I would rather play than the cleric/monk or druid/monk I was planning as a replacement divine class for CC however. It just doesnt feel as cool as a monk. But like everything else in this game I will only really know once I play the class.

I sometimes get the feeling dpr is something far too many forum users focus on.

Sorry for the rant

Spells over ride just about everything you said...

and the Blessings are actually pretty useful for Sacred Fists (free action summons here I come :P).

Sacred Fists get a Fort Save version of Evasion so that is cool.

High Jump is a joke ability... really, most monks tend to trade High Jump and Feather Fall for more useful abilities... oh and spells.

Skill points are cool, but monks rarely have the Int to get more. And skill points are kinda meh when you have spells.

Spells need time to cast. Too many have I seen some inquisitor or some magus stacking their spell to be ready after the end of the combat....


War priest. Cast spells as a swift action.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Dark Immortal wrote:

Next you're going to argue that since Ki abilities are mystical and I want speed, attacks and mystical powers while having a high ac, I should just play a wizard and call it a monk. I even get to hold a quarterstaff.....

Like.....seriously?

Yes, seriously.

I had a player whose ninja character used the Sorcerer class (obscurement spell for smoke bombs, etc.), and it worked out perfectly -- way better than if he had selected "Ninja" as his class. Another one used the Barbarian class mechanics to represent a monk whose training allowed him to slip into a trance in a fight, like he was "in the zone." These sorts of things work out really nicely if your mind isn't so rigid that it breaks when confronted with something other than a stereotype.


Saigo Takamori wrote:
PIXIE DUST wrote:
Skull wrote:

I love monks. I follow the golden rule of ignoring the "monks suck" feeling the forums give off. I know monks have issues, but every monk I make has been a blast to play. The different archtypes keep it interesting for me.

Sure basically everyone trades out slow fall for something else. A ring of feather fall is not that expensive after all.

I for one do not see how a sacred fist makes a better monk than the monk. Ki pool much later, ac bonus to deflection, no disease immunity, high jump, evasion, skill points, reflex save, stunning fists (required for many style feats) andmore.

It is a cool archtype I would rather play than the cleric/monk or druid/monk I was planning as a replacement divine class for CC however. It just doesnt feel as cool as a monk. But like everything else in this game I will only really know once I play the class.

I sometimes get the feeling dpr is something far too many forum users focus on.

Sorry for the rant

Spells over ride just about everything you said...

and the Blessings are actually pretty useful for Sacred Fists (free action summons here I come :P).

Sacred Fists get a Fort Save version of Evasion so that is cool.

High Jump is a joke ability... really, most monks tend to trade High Jump and Feather Fall for more useful abilities... oh and spells.

Skill points are cool, but monks rarely have the Int to get more. And skill points are kinda meh when you have spells.

Spells need time to cast. Too many have I seen some inquisitor or some magus stacking their spell to be ready after the end of the combat....

Er ... did you miss the part about how Warpriest can cast their buff spells and activate sacred weapon and some of their blessings as free and swift actions? Because that rather mitigates the whole action economy problem.


Because zen archer is the best archetype in the game? Look up "The One" Who can easily 1v1 the entire bestiary, most of it at the same time.

The base monk is loathed by the designers. The writers of the archetypes love it though.

That said Monk 1 or Monk 2 with either Monk of many styles or Zen archer with sacred fist X tends to be better than actually GOING monk. Fervor is just fundamentally stronger than anything the monk gets. Arguably fervor is the strongest type of mechanic in the game and you need something horribly broken to get better than it (More magic, Free metamagics, Exct)


Saigo Takamori wrote:

The plan here:

1. you do almost no damage.
2. Your goal is: be the main target ( good ac, almost immune to magic), boost your allies and stun creature (at 23, even strong fort monster will fail almost 50% of the time...)

One of these things does not compliment the other. o_o

I'm looking at this and...wouldn't playing a bard play pretty much the same way except better in just about every way, and be more playable from level 1? Beyond the stunning fist trick (which is a good trick), I'm not really seeing much usefulness in this guy.


Saigo Takamori wrote:

Here is an idea of what can be made of a support/tank monk. Quite good and unique I think. There is enough reason in this build to play a monk IMO

Rojik, the sensei

Dwarf, Monk sensei/quigong 10
Str: 11+2
Dex: 12+2
Con: 14+2
Wis: 20+2+4
Int: 12
Cha: 5
Hp: 10d8+30=75
Ac 10+2(monk)+2(dex)+8(wis)+4(barkskin)+3(bracer)+1(dodge)=28
Init:+2
Save: will: 15(19) fort: 10(14) ref: 9(13)
Bab: +7/+2
Attack: fist: +17(1d10+6)
Special: stunning fist +19( dc23) 11 per day

Special: inspire courage +3 (18 rounds per day), barkskin (+3 na,1ki), scorching ray (2x+11, 4d6,2ki)

Feat: dodge, deflect arrow, steel soul, mantis style, mantis wisdom, blind-fight, mantis torment

Equipment: amulette of mighty fist+2, belt of physical perfection +2, headband of alluring wisdom +4, bracer of armor +3
The plan here: you do almost no damage. Your goal is: be the main target ( good ac, almost immune to magic), boost your allies and stun creature (at 23, even strong fort monster will fail almost 50% of the time...)

I play something similar to this, but I add Crushing Blow because you otherwise suck whenever you get a full-attack.

You become the main target because enemies know that if you ever hit them, they lose.


Saigo Takamori wrote:

Here is an idea of what can be made of a support/tank monk. Quite good and unique I think. There is enough reason in this build to play a monk IMO

Rojik, the sensei

Dwarf, Monk sensei/quigong 10
Str: 11+2
Dex: 12+2
Con: 14+2
Wis: 20+2+4
Int: 12
Cha: 5
Hp: 10d8+30=75
Ac 10+2(monk)+2(dex)+8(wis)+4(barkskin)+3(bracer)+1(dodge)=28
Init:+2
Save: will: 15(19) fort: 10(14) ref: 9(13)
Bab: +7/+2
Attack: fist: +17(1d10+6)
Special: stunning fist +19( dc23) 11 per day

Special: inspire courage +3 (18 rounds per day), barkskin (+3 na,1ki), scorching ray (2x+11, 4d6,2ki)

Feat: dodge, deflect arrow, steel soul, mantis style, mantis wisdom, blind-fight, mantis torment

Equipment: amulette of mighty fist+2, belt of physical perfection +2, headband of alluring wisdom +4, bracer of armor +3
The plan here: you do almost no damage. Your goal is: be the main target ( good ac, almost immune to magic), boost your allies and stun creature (at 23, even strong fort monster will fail almost 50% of the time...)

I play something similar to this, but I add Crushing Blow because you otherwise suck whenever you get a full-attack.

You become the main target because enemies know that if you ever hit them with a stunning strike, they lose.


PIXIE DUST wrote:


Actually the Rogue has been more eviscerated than any core class... Now you have:

Investiator, Slayer, Bard, Ranger, Alchemist, and Inquisitor that do its job just as well... if not better. And with archetypes and traits they LITERALLY can do everything a rogue does... but better.

But you have to compare apples to apples and add in Rogue archetypes.

In any case, it's just part of Pathfinder with it's 30 or so classes- there is no "niche protection". The Sorc and the Witch can do the job of the Wizard, the Oracle can fill in for the Cleric, etc. These in no way invalidate the Wizard or the Cleric.

True, the basic Rogue has some issues, but there are rogue archetypes which are very good- Scout, Thug, Ninja.


DrDeth wrote:
In any case, it's just part of Pathfinder with it's 30 or so classes- there is no "niche protection". The Sorc and the Witch can do the job of the Wizard, the Oracle can fill in for the Cleric, etc. These in no way invalidate the Wizard or the Cleric.

*laughing*

There's a reason my GM rebuilt all the witches in Reign of Winter as wizards after we encountered a number of them. Witches most definitely do not do a wizard's job. Hahaha.


Ashiel wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:

The plan here:

1. you do almost no damage.
2. Your goal is: be the main target ( good ac, almost immune to magic), boost your allies and stun creature (at 23, even strong fort monster will fail almost 50% of the time...)

One of these things does not compliment the other. o_o

I'm looking at this and...wouldn't playing a bard play pretty much the same way except better in just about every way, and be more playable from level 1? Beyond the stunning fist trick (which is a good trick), I'm not really seeing much usefulness in this guy.

Reasons Stunning Fist isn't even a minor saving grace of the class:

  • Can only be used once per round.
  • Has to be declared before the attack is made, wasted if the attack doesn't hit.
  • Allows a Fortitude save to negate the effect entirely.
  • Negated if the enemy somehow reduces or eliminates the damage immediately.
  • A long list of things are just outright immune to it: undead, constructs, plants, oozes, incorporeal targets, and anything immune to critical hits.

People like to complain about rogue's SA needing help to line up. Stunning Fist is just as bad if not worse.


Ashiel wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:

The plan here:

1. you do almost no damage.
2. Your goal is: be the main target ( good ac, almost immune to magic), boost your allies and stun creature (at 23, even strong fort monster will fail almost 50% of the time...)

One of these things does not compliment the other. o_o

I'm looking at this and...wouldn't playing a bard play pretty much the same way except better in just about every way, and be more playable from level 1? Beyond the stunning fist trick (which is a good trick), I'm not really seeing much usefulness in this guy.

Yeah, you can't really make MMO style tanks in Pathfinder, since it's very hard to compel enemies to attack a specific member of the group. Sure, sometimes there'll be chokepoints and or encounters that happen in five foot wide corridors, but any time the terrain isn't narrow or the enemy has access to unconventional movement (Which is fairly common at level 10) you can't really tank force an enemy to focus on you. With such low damage, eating an attack of opportunity to bypass the monk is a non issue.

Not to mention that you have to do damage to apply stunning fist, and DR is fairly common by level 10. Plus there are a goodly number of enemies that are immune to stunning.

Just to toss out an especially painful example, going up against a CR 9 greater Fire Elemental given us enemy that ignores stuns, cuts his damage down to 1d10-4, and the monk takes 2d8 damage every time it hits from burn. The Elemental could literally just stand there doing noting, and let the monk kill himself attacking it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:

The plan here:

1. you do almost no damage.
2. Your goal is: be the main target ( good ac, almost immune to magic), boost your allies and stun creature (at 23, even strong fort monster will fail almost 50% of the time...)

One of these things does not compliment the other. o_o

That's because they are so impolite... I could forgive that, though, if they at least complemented each other. ;)


Chengar Qordath wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:

The plan here:

1. you do almost no damage.
2. Your goal is: be the main target ( good ac, almost immune to magic), boost your allies and stun creature (at 23, even strong fort monster will fail almost 50% of the time...)

One of these things does not compliment the other. o_o

I'm looking at this and...wouldn't playing a bard play pretty much the same way except better in just about every way, and be more playable from level 1? Beyond the stunning fist trick (which is a good trick), I'm not really seeing much usefulness in this guy.

Yeah, you can't really make MMO style tanks in Pathfinder, since it's very hard to compel enemies to attack a specific member of the group. Sure, sometimes there'll be chokepoints and or encounters that happen in five foot wide corridors, but any time the terrain isn't narrow or the enemy has access to unconventional movement (Which is fairly common at level 10) you can't really tank force an enemy to focus on you. With such low damage, eating an attack of opportunity to bypass the monk is a non issue.

Not to mention that you have to do damage to apply stunning fist, and DR is fairly common by level 10. Plus there are a goodly number of enemies that are immune to stunning.

Just to toss out an especially painful example, going up against a CR 9 greater Fire Elemental given us enemy that ignores stuns, cuts his damage down to 1d10-4, and the monk takes 2d8 damage every time it hits from burn. The Elemental could literally just stand there doing noting, and let the monk kill himself attacking it.

Ouch, not even any help from evasion there. Going with their +2 or whatever temple sword probably won't fare any better, either.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The life of a monk is one of self-imposed obscurity, self-sacrifice, and suppressing your desire for worldly things like power and fame.

Class is functioning to spec.


If Monk was suppose to be this Uber Defensive class, then why doesn't it have d10 HD and Add Con to AC with a later addition of Wis as a dodge bonus?

Shadow Lodge

Because d10 is reserved to Full BAB classes.

51 to 100 of 405 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Monk, Is there any reason for it All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.